I am tired of Christians using the argument that because the big bang is so difficult to explain that we can't prove god did it.
I have been avidly watching Carl Sagan Cosmos and this idea kind of comes from somethings he said.
I am not a scientist and this is just an out there idea about the beginning of our universe it is in no way absolute or and may be ridiculous but just want to know what others think.
Imagine another Universe that existed before ours, this Universe grew a gigantic Red Giant that once it imploded in on itself created a black hole. The black hole being large enough it began to draw into it matter from this Universe. Once inside the black hole the matter is heated and compacted. It is than thrown out into what we call the Big Bang.
I might not have explained it properly as it was just a thought.
Thats M Theory or String Theory he's talking about is that right?
I think the Hindu philosophy is the only one that talks about the age of the universe as being in the billions of years old.
He has teeth - the problem lies in his thick accent.
An argument is only as good as its premises. I would simply challenge them to prove that something can't come out of nothing.
On the quantum level, particles come out of nothing and then quickly disappear all the time, so there's nothing in the real physical world proving something can't come out of nothing. Much the opposite, actually.
We've had to rethink what we mean by "nothingness" in recent years as we learn that there's really nothing corresponding to "empty space." It turns out that it's useful to think of space as a substance teaming with activity on the smallest scale. There seems to have been a time when space sprang into existence, but time started then as well, so to talk about a "before" is a rather odd way of talking. You can't have "before" without presupposing a time going backward into some great beyond, perhaps infinity. The thing is, infinity is a mathematical concept, not physical one. When infinity gets involved, you end up with strange things like singularities where mathematical-physical equations stop working.
The problem with religious people who try to talk about the beginning of the universe is that they try to fit it into the experiences of everyday life. But if anything is other than everyday life it's the beginning of the universe.
The "I don't know, therefore god" argument is somewhat the inverse of Dostoevsky's "God does not exist, therefor everything is permitted." argument. So, we don't know who (if a who and not a what) ceated the universe, so anything might have created the universe. Maybe Buckwheat from the Our Gang comedies created the universe.
Maybe Buckwheat from the Our Gang comedies created the universe.
Exactly. Because we know so many biblical claims are NOT true, I have Buckwheat or Spanky slightly ahead of the biblical god as a creator. I try to have an open, scientific, logical approach, but like you said we are limited by our experiences (and evolution). I try not to reject ideas on principle or on the desire to be correct.
Going back to the original universe creation thought, the image that always comes to my mind is an ant, contemplating how its island was created, eventually discovering the vast interworkings of Planet Earth after generations of scientific inquiry (okay, super-ants). There's no feasible way for them to extend that knowledge so far past their current understanding of existence that they would begin to discover what we allot to astronomy.
Apply that idea to our understanding of the universe circa-Big Bang, and there's that same unintelligible vastness between where we are and where we might go in hundreds or thousands of years. Maybe the "Big Bang" is just a mega-black hole exploding; maybe it's two string theory branes colliding; maybe out universe is just a single cell in an unimaginably colossal organism, of which millions or billions more exist, each cell its own "universe" by our standards; our we really just some being's dream? There are so staggeringly many possibilities for what the real truth about existence might be, it's absolutely absurd when religious people (or alternatively, simply ignorant people) claim that not understanding something means their millennia-old desert book must be exactly right, or science is wrong "on principle," or any of the ridiculous things people claim.
What's fascinating, Julian, and at the same time, a little disconcerting (though you and I will never see it), is that in about 3 billion years, the galaxies will have moved so far apart, that our own galaxy will be the only one visible, and whatever sentient beings that have managed to survive to that time, and I seriously doubt that they will be us, will see the universe that the Bible depicts, a single galaxy, alone in a sea of nothing, and there will be those who say that they are special, that their god created a universe specifically for them, and there will be no evidence to dispute it.
If I understand you correctly, Brendan, you mean the Universe comes into and goes out of existence like a cosmic pulse, and therefore there is no beginning, because each beginning as we call the Big Bang, is just another beat of the cosmic pulse?
It might make more sense to us, than the concept of there being nothing before the Big Bang and time not existing before it either, but that may simply be because we can't grasp that non-time non-space idea, as we are spacial temporal beings ourselves.
Strega, remember animal house?
Larry: [to Jennings, while high] Okay. That means that our whole solar system could be, like one tiny atom in the fingernail of some other giant being. [Jennings nods] This is too much! That means one tiny atom in my fingernail could be--
Jennings: Could be one little tiny universe.
Larry: Could I buy some pot from you?
I remember it, but I can't say I can quote from it, grin.